Lecture 9:

Cultures and
globalization
 Contents

I. Hofstede’s dimensions of culture

II. The influence of national cultural

differences upon organizations
operating globally
 Hofstede’s
dimensions of cultures
1. Hofstede and values
• Geert Hofstede - an influential Dutch social psychologist who
studied the interactions between national cultures and
organizational cultures., sometimes called the father of
modern cross-cultural science and thinking, is a social
psychologist who focused on a comparison of nations using a
statistical analysis of two unique databases.
– The first and largest database composed of answers that
matched employee samples from forty different countries
to the same survey questions focused on attitudes and
beliefs.
– The second consisted of answers to some of the same
questions by Hofstede’s executive students who came
from fifteen countries and from a variety of companies and
industries.
 Hofstede’s
dimensions of cultures
1. Hofstede and values
• He developed a framework for understanding the systematic
differences between nations in these two databases. This
framework focused on value dimensions. Values, in this case,
are broad preferences for one state of affairs over others, and
they are mostly unconscious.
• Most of us understand that values are our own culture’s or
society’s ideas about what is good, bad, acceptable, or
unacceptable. Hofstede developed a framework for
understanding how these values underlie organizational
behavior. Through his database research, he identified five
key value dimensions that analyze and interpret the
behaviors, values, and attitudes of a national culture.
 Hofstede’s
dimensions of cultures
2. Hofstede’s framework
• Hofstede identified five key value
dimensions that analyze and interpret the
behaviors, values, and attitudes of a
national culture:
– Power distance
– Individualism
– Masculinity
– Uncertainty avoidance (UA)
– Long-term orientation
 Hofstede’s
dimensions of cultures
2. Hofstede’s framework
a. Power distance
– Power distance refers to how openly a society or
culture accepts or does not accept differences
between people, as in hierarchies in the workplace, in
politics, and so on.
– For example, high power distance cultures openly
accept that a boss is “higher” and as such deserves a
more formal respect and authority. Examples of these
cultures include Japan, Mexico, and the Philippines.
In Japan or Mexico, the senior person is almost a
father figure and is automatically given respect and
usually loyalty without questions
 Hofstede’s
dimensions of cultures
2. Hofstede’s framework
a. Power distance (cont.)
– At the other end of the spectrum are low power
distance cultures, in which superiors and
subordinates are more likely to see each other as
equal in power. Countries found at this end of the
spectrum include Austria and Denmark.
– To be sure, not all cultures view power in the same
ways. In Sweden, Norway, and Israel, for example,
respect for equality is a warranty of freedom.
Subordinates and managers alike often have carte
blanche to speak their minds.
 Hofstede’s
dimensions of cultures
2. Hofstede’s framework
b. Individualism
– Individualism refers to people’s tendency to take care
of themselves and their immediate circle of family and
friends, perhaps at the expense of the overall society.
In individualistic cultures, what counts most is self-
realization. Initiating alone, sweating alone, achieving
alone—not necessarily collective efforts—are what
win applause.
– For example:
• The United States and Northern European societies are often
labeled as individualistic. In the United States, individualism
is valued and promoted—from its political structure
(individual rights and democracy) to entrepreneurial zeal
(capitalism). Other examples of high-individualism cultures
include Australia and the United Kingdom.
 Hofstede’s
dimensions of cultures
2. Hofstede’s framework
b. Individualism (cont.)
– On the other hand, in collectivist societies, group goals
take precedence over individuals’ goals. Basically,
individual members render loyalty to the group, and the
group takes care of its individual members. Rather than
giving priority to “me,” the “us” identity predominates. Of
paramount importance is pursuing the common goals,
beliefs, and values of the group as a whole—so much so,
in some cases, that it’s nearly impossible for outsiders to
enter the group.
– Cultures that prize collectivism and the group over the
individual include Singapore, Korea, Mexico, and Arab
nations.
– The protections offered by traditional Japanese companies
come to mind as a distinctively group-oriented value.
 Hofstede’s
dimensions of cultures
2. Hofstede’s framework
c. Masculinity
– Masculinity refers to how a culture ranks on
traditionally perceived “masculine” values:
assertiveness, materialism, and less concern for
others.
– In masculine-oriented cultures, gender roles are
usually crisply defined. Men tend to be more focused
on performance, ambition, and material success.
They cut tough and independent personas, while
women cultivate modesty and quality of life.
– For example: Cultures in Japan and Latin American
are examples of masculine-oriented cultures.
 Hofstede’s
dimensions of cultures
2. Hofstede’s framework
c. Masculinity (cont.)
– In contrast, feminine cultures are thought to emphasize
“feminine” values: concern for all, an emphasis on the
quality of life, and an emphasis on relationships.
– In feminine-oriented cultures, both genders swap roles,
with the focus on quality of life, service, and
independence.
– For example: The Scandinavian cultures rank as feminine
cultures, as do cultures in Switzerland and New Zealand.
The United States is actually more moderate, and its score
is ranked in the middle between masculine and feminine
classifications.
– For all these factors, it’s important to remember that
cultures don’t necessarily fall neatly into one camp or the
other.
 Hofstede’s
dimensions of cultures
2. Hofstede’s framework
d. Uncertainty avoidance (UA)
– This refers to how much uncertainty a society or culture is
willing to accept. It can also be considered an indication of
the risk propensity of people from a specific culture.
– People who have high uncertainty avoidance generally
prefer to steer clear of conflict and competition. They tend
to appreciate very clear instructions. At the office, sharply
defined rules and rituals are used to get tasks completed.
Stability and what is known are preferred to instability and
the unknown. Company cultures in these countries may
show a preference for low-risk decisions, and employees in
these companies are less willing to exhibit aggressiveness.
– For example: Japan and France are often considered clear
examples of societies with high uncertainty avoidance.
 Hofstede’s
dimensions of cultures
2. Hofstede’s framework
d. Uncertainty avoidance (cont.)
– In countries with low uncertainty avoidance, people
are more willing to take on risks, companies may
appear less formal and structured, and “thinking
outside the box” is valued.
– Examples of these cultures are Denmark, Singapore,
Australia, and to a slightly lesser extent, the United
States. Members of these cultures usually require
less formal rules to interact.
 Hofstede’s
dimensions of cultures
2. Hofstede’s framework
e. Long-term orientation
– This value refers to whether a culture has a long-term or
short-term orientation. This dimension was added by
Hofstede after the original four you just read about. It
resulted in the effort to understand the difference in
thinking between the East and the West. Certain values
are associated with each orientation.
– The long-term orientation values persistence,
perseverance, thriftiness, and having a sense of shame.
These are evident in traditional Eastern cultures.
– For example: based on these values, it’s easy to see why
a Japanese CEO is likely to apologize or take the blame
for a faulty product or process.
 Hofstede’s
dimensions of cultures
2. Hofstede’s framework
e. Long-term orientation (cont.)
– The short-term orientation values tradition only to the
extent of fulfilling social obligations or providing gifts
or favors. These cultures are more likely to be
focused on the immediate or short-term impact of an
issue.
– For example: not surprisingly, the United Kingdom
and the United States rank low on the long-term
orientation.
 Implications of
Hofstede’s framework
– Long- and short-term orientation and the other value dimensions
in the business arena are all evolving as many people earn
business degrees and gain experience outside their home
cultures and countries, thereby diluting the significance of a
single cultural perspective.
– As a result, in practice, these five dimensions do not occur as
single values but are really woven together and interdependent,
creating very complex cultural interactions.
– Even though these five values are constantly shifting and not
static, they help us begin to understand how and why people
from different cultures may think and act as they do.
• Hofstede’s study demonstrates that there are national
and regional cultural groupings that affect the behavior of
societies and organizations and that these are persistent
over time.